The truth about AIDS

#27
#27
vol_in_ar said:
what would that be...

back to sub sahara africa, I think it's due to amount of unproteted sex and number of partners
Click to expand...

The chances of you getting AIDS through normal, vaginal sex are not much higher than you contracting it from saliva or sweat...

To catch AIDS, you almost have to be going out of your way to do something to contract it (e.g. sharing needles, exchanging blood, raw rectal intercourse, etc).

For a disease that is theorized to be carried by reckless sex of any kind (hetero or otherwise), it seems alarming that gay males seem to be one of the demographic groups that are the most likely to get it.

AIDS in the black community can be easily explained, also: High numbers of men in the criminal justice system... use your imagination, folks.
 
#28
#28
Rasputin_Vol said:
The chances of you getting AIDS through normal, vaginal sex are not much higher than you contracting it from saliva or sweat...

To catch AIDS, you almost have to be going out of your way to do something to contract it (e.g. sharing needles, exchanging blood, raw rectal intercourse, etc).

For a disease that is theorized to be carried by reckless sex of any kind (hetero or otherwise), it seems alarming that gay males seem to be one of the demographic groups that are the most likely to get it.

AIDS in the black community can be easily explained, also: High numbers of men in the criminal justice system... use your imagination, folks.
Click to expand...

This isn't accurate. It's actually been proven that AIDS can become airborne for a few seconds in the case of surgery (bonesaw, etc) where it turns the blood into a fine mist. Many doctors well versed in HIV/AIDS have complained about this and have wanted to implement mandatory HIV/AIDS test on all patients (currently not allowed).

It's quite simple why HIV/AIDS is more prevalent in gay men -- 1) statistically they have far more partners and 2) let's just say the likelihood of blood transfer is much higher.

As for Africa -- pretty simple there. An enormous amount of prostitution and unprotected sex.
 
#29
#29
blood to blood mixing is what most easily transmits HIV. What does it matter how? So what if it is from anal sex or needles or what have you? It doesn't make it any less of a horrible disease that has the potential to infect and kill innocent people.
 
#30
#30
VolByBirth said:
This isn't accurate. It's actually been proven that AIDS can become airborne for a few seconds in the case of surgery (bonesaw, etc) where it turns the blood into a fine mist. Many doctors well versed in HIV/AIDS have complained about this and have wanted to implement mandatory HIV/AIDS test on all patients (currently not allowed).
Click to expand...

What about vaginal sex, sweat or saliva makes what I said inaccurate or makes it in anyway comparable to doctors working in the operating room with blood flowing all over the place? Not only that, but you don't see a higher incidence of AIDS/HIV among doctors than any other profession... or at least not as stark of a contrast as you would between heterosexual and homosexual men.
 
#31
#31
joevol320 said:
my mom was talking to a doctor in chattanooga and she asked him about aids in chattanooga. he said there are about 3-4 time more people infected with hiv and aids than the official statistic say. he said if the actual percentage was brought out, people in chattanooga would freak out. he also said the percentage increase is really astounding.
Click to expand...

I'll scratch Chattanooga off my vacation destiny and stick with Thailand.:p
 
#32
#32
Rasputin_Vol said:
So I gave blood on Thursday and had to do all of the paperwork and questionaire jazz. Anyways, the majority of the questions asked were "have you had sex with a man since 1977", "have you ever had sex with a partner that had sex with a man since 1977"... blah blah blah. Inside the bus, there was a sign hanging up saying essentially the samething and that you can't give blood if any of these conditions are true. Very politically incorrect, and very (very) much directed towards an anti-gay male bias. Now how can something like be so openly allowed to carry on in 2008/2009 with all of the hypersensitivity there is about alternative lifestyles?

The truth is, that the ACLU/California hippie types that run our country know the truth about how AIDS is commonly spread... Sure, you have your occasional blood transfusion that went wrong or the IV drug user. But the truth is that these guys can't come out and say that gay male sex is an activity that is highly likely to transmit the HIV/AIDS virus. And these guys can't risk a public outbreak of tainted blood fom some of these donors. Even ACLU types have car accidents or operations that will need blood from donors, and even they don't want to be infected. But if it came down to covering up this truth for say some other knd of personal or political gain, these same people would not tolerate the type of language or innuendo that was exibited on the bloodmobile.
Click to expand...

There are several reasons that people are prevented from giving blood. I haven't been able to give blood for the past 20 years because I (drum roll) have spent too much time in the UK and the fear of Mad Cow is still alive and well.
The collectors of blood don't have to be PC, just suspicious of anything that may be harmful to blood recipients. Personally, I prefer it that way and don't understand your concern with the questions.
 
#33
#33
KentheOrange said:
There are several reasons that people are prevented from giving blood. I haven't been able to give blood for the past 20 years because I (drum roll) have spent too much time in the UK and the fear of Mad Cow is still alive and well.
The collectors of blood don't have to be PC, just suspicious of anything that may be harmful to blood recipients. Personally, I prefer it that way and don't understand your concern with the questions.
Click to expand...
Out of about 50 questions asked, only 1 dealt with mad cow.

There were at least 10 questions that specifically referenced the year 1977 and specifically spoke about the donor's lifestyle...
 
#34
#34
Rasputin_Vol said:
The chances of you getting AIDS through normal, vaginal sex are not much higher than you contracting it from saliva or sweat...

To catch AIDS, you almost have to be going out of your way to do something to contract it (e.g. sharing needles, exchanging blood, raw rectal intercourse, etc).

For a disease that is theorized to be carried by reckless sex of any kind (hetero or otherwise), it seems alarming that gay males seem to be one of the demographic groups that are the most likely to get it.

AIDS in the black community can be easily explained, also: High numbers of men in the criminal justice system... use your imagination, folks.
Click to expand...

You must work very, very, very hard to be this ignorant.
 
#36
#36
vol_in_ar said:
what would that be...

back to sub sahara africa, I think it's due to amount of unproteted sex and number of partners
Click to expand...

This is a major factor for the rate of homosexual AIDS infection. The practice of sex between men also increases the risk of infection compared to heterosexual sex.
 
#37
#37
My neighbor had a pair of gay mules.
















They caught farm aids.

His son had a rock group with a gay drummer.



























They caught band aids.

The bass player was from Egypt.





















They caught foreign aids too.
 
#38
#38
Rasputin_Vol said:
Out of about 50 questions asked, only 1 dealt with mad cow.

There were at least 10 questions that specifically referenced the year 1977 and specifically spoke about the donor's lifestyle...
Click to expand...

Gee. Ya think the risk from aids might be 10 times the problem of mad cow?

Why does this bother you so much? Are you gay? Just asking.
 
#40
#40
KentheOrange said:
Gee. Ya think the risk from aids might be 10 times the problem of mad cow?

Why does this bother you so much? Are you gay? Just asking.
Click to expand...
It shamed him to have to admit his tryst with Erik Ainge a few years ago.
 
#41
#41
joevol320 said:
yeah, it's because of the media's sympathetic coverage of aids. cancer kill way more people yearly and doesn't near the coverage aids get. what's so bad is that aids could be wiped if out if guys didn't take in the ass with multiple dudes. cancer isn't a disease by choice.
Click to expand...

no, it wouldn't
 
#42
#42
duckman398686 said:
no, it wouldn't
Click to expand...

if people with aids, only had sex with one person, eventually the aid epidemic would stop because the people who have would eventually pass on. i would take a generation but it would drastically reduce the number of people who have aids.
 
#43
#43
joevol320 said:
if people with aids, only had sex with one person, eventually the aid epidemic would stop because the people who have would eventually pass on. i would take a generation but it would drastically reduce the number of people who have aids.
Click to expand...

sure it would reduce it, but there would still be too much lingering infected blood for it to go away that fast. having sex isn't the only way it can be transmitted. it's not that simple
 
#44
#44
duckman398686 said:
sure it would reduce it, but there would still be too much lingering infected blood for it to go away that fast. having sex isn't the only way it can be transmitted. it's not that simple
Click to expand...

oh i know it would take years, but it is possible. you would just have convince people with aids to only have sex with other people with aids. i know that sounds bad, but it would work eventually.
 
#45
#45
duckman398686 said:
sure it would reduce it, but there would still be too much lingering infected blood for it to go away that fast. having sex isn't the only way it can be transmitted. it's not that simple
Click to expand...
We had a chance in the early 80's (1980-1983) to quarantine those that were infected when it was only a few hundred with the disease. But it was politically incorrect to do that. AIDS would have been a distant memory, but people on the left began demogoging the issue and conjuring up images of Jews in cattlecars and making it as though a quarantine would have been a violation of human rights...
 
#46
#46
Rasputin_Vol said:
We had a chance in the early 80's (1980-1983) to quarantine those that were infected when it was only a few hundred with the disease. But it was politically incorrect to do that. AIDS would have been a distant memory, but people on the left began demogoging the issue and conjuring up images of Jews in cattlecars and making it as though a quarantine would have been a violation of human rights...
Click to expand...

put that on the list of the many liberal mistakes that have compounded over time.
 
#47
#47
Rasputin_Vol said:
What about vaginal sex, sweat or saliva makes what I said inaccurate or makes it in anyway comparable to doctors working in the operating room with blood flowing all over the place? Not only that, but you don't see a higher incidence of AIDS/HIV among doctors than any other profession... or at least not as stark of a contrast as you would between heterosexual and homosexual men.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you can't contract HIV from sweat.
 
#48
#48
KentheOrange said:
Gee. Ya think the risk from aids might be 10 times the problem of mad cow?

Why does this bother you so much? Are you gay? Just asking.
Click to expand...

I wasn't arguing that the threat of AIDS wasn't worthy of it being at least 10X's the threat that mad cow would be. My point is that the they specifically (and heavily) concentrated on activities associated with the gay male lifestyle. And it was done in a pretty politically incorrect manner. In any other case, had the type of language or bias been present, an ACLU or liberal group would have been up in arms about the blatant insinuation that gay male intercourse is more of a threat than heterosexual intercourse. That is where the double standard... the level of sanctimonious outrage in other instances would be far greater than what has apparently been exibited in this case.

And thanks for showing your true colors and using the old liberal attack on me and questioning my sexuality. I was waiting for one of you to try that attack. I hope it doesn't disappoint you, but I like chics exclusively.
 
#49
#49
Rasputin_Vol said:
We had a chance in the early 80's (1980-1983) to quarantine those that were infected when it was only a few hundred with the disease. But it was politically incorrect to do that. AIDS would have been a distant memory, but people on the left began demogoging the issue and conjuring up images of Jews in cattlecars and making it as though a quarantine would have been a violation of human rights...
Click to expand...

It might have delayed an outbreak like we see now but it would have happened once the disease jumped.
 
#50
#50
Rasputin_Vol said:
We had a chance in the early 80's (1980-1983) to quarantine those that were infected when it was only a few hundred with the disease. But it was politically incorrect to do that. AIDS would have been a distant memory, but people on the left began demogoging the issue and conjuring up images of Jews in cattlecars and making it as though a quarantine would have been a violation of human rights...
Click to expand...

The initial HIV infection isn't much different symptomatically than the flu. It takes about 10 years for you to start seeing the AIDS symptoms. So I don't see how we could have quarantined everyone. There wouldn't have been a way to identify them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top